I've split this off form the first badge request post:

... the second badge is for a question that reaches a certain upvote amount before being answered, analogous to the enlightened badge. I don't know how many upvotes it should be at, but 10 seems good. Most easy questions are answered before 10 upvotes, but unanswerably bad ones never make it to 10 upvotes.

Update: Here is a sample query from Stack Exchange Data Explorer, though it doesn't exclude duplicates.

  • 4
    I would also suggest that fast answers that don't get a lot of votes (or are negatively voted) should be excluded. Too often when a hard question is asked, a whole bunch of wild-guess (wrong) answers come in. Only much later does a correct answer come get heavily upvoted and accepted. – Mysticial Sep 6 '12 at 19:41
  • 1
    I think this is basically the same as the Baffling Badge suggestion. The only difference is it's based on views instead of upvotes. – Bill the Lizard Sep 6 '12 at 19:53
  • 2
    @BilltheLizard but this should show quality of post too I'd hope. I think views alone just show popularity. – Pureferret Sep 6 '12 at 19:56
  • 3
    Ha, being Dutch, that badge has a completely different meaning than I expected.... – Bart Sep 6 '12 at 19:58
  • This query excludes closed questions. Most of the top questions in your query have no answers because they were merged into another question. – mmyers Dec 5 '14 at 17:00
  • @mmyers that doesn't seem to exclude merged questions (PostHistoryTypeId =37?) – Pureferret Dec 6 '14 at 22:04
  • @Pureferret: It is technically possible to merge a question without first closing it as a duplicate, but that should be a pretty rare case. These queries are only for ballpark figures anyway, right? – mmyers Dec 6 '14 at 22:25
  • 1
    Why did you accept the answer? Your request is not completed yet. – nicael Dec 13 '14 at 20:33

Let me first briefly recapture the idea to avoid misunderstandings: You want to have a badge awarded to people who manage to ask a question that is challenging but well-asked (and in particular not difficult to answer due to being badly asked).

While I like the idea, I fail to understand why you require that the question receives an answer for the badge to be awarded (as least how I and some others understood it). If a question is really difficult, it might end up with no answer forever or at least for a very long time. And questions that remain unanswered forever due to being bad are mostly excluded by the score criterion anyway.

A few other aspects to consider:

  • I second Unihedron’s suggestion to allow for the question to have badly scoring answers. I would even go so far as to ignore answers with a score less than two (which is the requirement for bounties being auto-awarded).

  • There should be a time limit before first evaluating the badge conditions. This is to exclude questions that are very popular but comparably easy or inherently requiring rather long answers. Such questions could acquire the badge just by receiving upvotes faster than anybody can write a decent answer and not due to being challenging questions. Let’s also not forget that if there is a score criterion for the answers, people need time to vote on them too.

    To make this limit somewhat adaptive to slower sites or tags, I would let it depend on the time a score of 10 was reached instead of the creation of the question. (As a side-effect, this would also attenuate the advantage for questions that only became good after editing.) Without being well-versed on the big sites and their time scales, I suggest two hours for now.

  • Questions that were closed at some time should not be eligible for the badge as they can be upvoted but not be answered during being closed. For example, if a question gets closed rather quickly for whatever reason and then is edited into a passable question, it may receive sufficent upvotes before being reopened. Also, this might be a way to game the system.

To summarise:

Asked a question that had a score of ten or more for two hours without attracting an answer scoring two or more or ever being closed.

As this is certainly more difficult than Nice Question and in analogy to Enlightened, I propose that badge to be silver (should the values remain that way). A gold version with higher difficulty suggests itself.

  • 2 hours is way too short IMHO. Only time shows a good hard question, like in science -- the good hard conjectures are decades old. I would think of the scope of days or weeks, not hours. Maybe 2 days, which is the bounty limit as well. – yo' Dec 14 '15 at 9:24
  • @yo': Please consider that on most sites the major contributor to the waiting time would not be the two hours but the time it takes for the question to reach a score of ten (at least on most sites/tags). You could view the criterion this way: Ten people upvoted the question and had a decent amount of time (two hours) to answer and have their question upvoted. – Wrzlprmft Dec 14 '15 at 11:56

If this is to be implemented, I propose a similar, but slightly more reasonable modification:

Asked question having no positively scored answer and received a new answer at question score of 10 or more. (This badge can be awarded multiple times.)

This is because questions are only considered Unanswered and show up in the /unanswered tab when they do not have positively scored answers. This means that the badge will only be awarded when the question receives the answer when it has no useful (>0 score) answers. The room for exploiting this is also very little.


I would support having this as one of those novelty gold badges like Unsung Hero or Reversal (and have it titled "Tough Question" or similar), and change the upvote threshold to 50. The criterion would be specified as follows:

Ask a question that receives a score of 50 with no upvoted answers

It would apply regardless of whether the question eventually gets answered or not, and also regardless of the timeframe in which the 50 upvotes get awarded, because a question with 50 upvotes is already halfway towards getting a gold badge for having 100 upvotes anyway.

  • 1
    By looking on the "unanswered" tab, about 31 questions on Meta SE would currently be eligible for this badge. – Joe Z. Dec 14 '15 at 7:47
  • This sounds absurdely hard, in particular on smaller sites where getting +50 on a question almost only works with hot network questions, which in turn favour (or are even limited) to questions with answer. In general, you are very likely to receive some answer before reaching +50 and if only some of the many visitors that upvote you to +50 also upvotes that answer, there goes the badge. – Wrzlprmft Dec 14 '15 at 13:56
  • @Wrzlprmft That's why I called it a novelty gold badge. It's not intended to be a usual achievement like Famous Question or Great Question that can be earned just by participating especially well on the site. The threshold could be lowered to something like 25 or 30, though. – Joe Z. Dec 14 '15 at 23:41
  • @Wrzlprmft Also, one of my questions on the Code Golf Stack Exchange (about building a Tetris engine out of cellular automata) currently qualifies for this badge. – Joe Z. May 27 '16 at 6:26

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .